Nikon D750 & D780

[Livin The Dream]

My most commonly used presets are based on VSCO, but people do process differently and so they only form a base. I tend to process on the bright side and some of the ones I use can look quite different when pulled back a bit, certainly more film like. VSCO is different than most as there's a profile at the heart of each one but they are fully tuneable so I have tweaked most of them slightly such as losing the grain and saving.

It depends how funky you want to get, they're great for something different. But if you just want a nice clean base then that is something that can be done yourself.

 

[kingo15]

When I used lightroom briefly I did aquire a few from the Internet I think I managed a file with about 100 in it

 

[Graham]

I have only managed one set of presets (freebies) and any others just wont upload to LR
Maybe hoping that this new PC thats going online this week/weekend will sort that out

 

[Ed Sutton]

I don't know why people need long lenses and still have to crop their bird pictures. 35mm is long enough.

 

[Clactonian]

Don't mean to interrupt the banter - but LR presets. Do you guys use them, if so, where do you get them from? Looking to branch out my processing style and looking for some inspiration.

Yes. Quite a few downloaded free but I only use on occasions and then only as a starting point for an edit.

 

[Chuckoir]

Yes. Quite a few downloaded free but I only use on occasions and then only as a starting point for an edit.

Yeah I think that's exactly what I want them for - a starting point whereby I can tweak to my own taste.

Having said that, I think I just need to fart around with the sliders a bit more to see what I can come up with - I think I'd begrudge paying for them.

I'll have a trawl of Youtube as well to see what settings other use. I understand it's a mostly a personal choice, but I often see pics on line and think 'Oooh I like that', but often don't know where to start.

Anyway, thanks for the suggestions, folks - and the PMs - much appreciated!

 

[snerkler]

IMO the easiest way to get the film look is to use curves and cross process.

 

[T_J_G]

IMO the easiest way to get the film look is to use curves and cross process.

Or use film

 

[snerkler]

Or use film

Lol, thought it was obvious I was still referring to presets

 

[siblingchris]

And I will post more horse pics... with a D750...

at F4... so cue the hate!

Tbh. You could post with d500 and I wouldn't know the difference.

Not being funny. Just saying. I thought you did a good job with that last batch of shots in particular I saw. You probably fuss over them more than you need to. And the only person it matters to in terms of which camera is you whilst you're taking them. The experience of taking the pics is different for you, but not for me viewing them.

 

[snerkler]

Tbh. You could post with d500 and I wouldn't know the difference.

TBH if someone posted pics with the D750 and D500 I doubt any of us would be able to tell which is which without the EXIF

 

[siblingchris]

TBH if someone posted pics with the D750 and D500 I doubt any of us would be able to tell which is which without the EXIF

Exactly.

I know the point of these threads is to talk about the camera....but I'm more interested in how people use their d750 and get the most out of it for their own artistic pleasure, so I can learn myself, rather than having a spec war. That gets a bit tedious sometimes tbh.

I almost went for a d500 when I recently upgraded. In the end I bored myself obsessing over specs and decided to just look at lots of Flickr photos and think about what I liked most and the sort of things I might photo.....and of the two cameras the majority of photos I liked were taken with a d750.

If you are lucky enough to have access to both, good for you, but I think unless we are pros most of us can't afford that and decent glass too!

 

[JJ!]

I had gas, I think I would have always been thinking of the D500 had I not tried it.

Just so happens it didn't work out so I can now just keeping gassing on lenses lol

 

[JJ!]

Tbh. You could post with d500 and I wouldn't know the difference.

Not being funny. Just saying. I thought you did a good job with that last batch of shots in particular I saw. You probably fuss over them more than you need to. And the only person it matters to in terms of which camera is you whilst you're taking them. The experience of taking the pics is different for you, but not for me viewing them.

Thank you

 

[siblingchris]

I had gas, I think I would have always been thinking of the D500 had I not tried it.

Reminds me of this. LOL [emoji3]

View: https://youtu.be/QeDkGnyDv9o

 

[snerkler]

I had gas, I think I would have always been thinking of the D500 had I not tried it.

Just so happens it didn't work out so I can now just keeping gassing on lenses lol

We all get GAS, and some of us just like trying other gear out out of curiosity etc. However, it's when we buy new gear thinking somehow it's going to make us better togs and miraculously solve all our problems that we start kidding ourselves

 

[snerkler]

Starting to think about my trip to the F1 at Silverstone already and starting to think about teleconverters for my 70-200mm f2.8. When I went to Donington last year I did end up taking most shots with the 70-200mm and cropping rather than my 150-600mm as the 150-600mm was big, heavy and cumbersome when panning, especially when shooting at the long end and the lens fully extended. So I'm starting to think that I might be better off with a TC and don't know whether I'd be better with the 1.4x or 1.7x and wondering if anyone's had experience of both?

I've used the 2x mark III before and wasn't overly impressed as it decreased IQ too much for me. Reduction in aperture isn't too much of a concern as I'll be shooting with a small aperture anyway to keep shutter speed down. My main concern is IQ degradation and autofocus performance. I'd rather use the 1.4x and crop more if it's going to give me noticeably better AF and better IQ. Any thoughts?

Also, if hiring works out quite expensive I'll probably buy used and then sell it on again after if I'd lose less money.

 

[Nuzik]

Starting to think about my trip to the F1 at Silverstone already and starting to think about teleconverters for my 70-200mm f2.8. When I went to Donington last year I did end up taking most shots with the 70-200mm and cropping rather than my 150-600mm as the 150-600mm was big, heavy and cumbersome when panning, especially when shooting at the long end and the lens fully extended. So I'm starting to think that I might be better off with a TC and don't know whether I'd be better with the 1.4x or 1.7x and wondering if anyone's had experience of both?

I've used the 2x mark III before and wasn't overly impressed as it decreased IQ too much for me. Reduction in aperture isn't too much of a concern as I'll be shooting with a small aperture anyway to keep shutter speed down. My main concern is IQ degradation and autofocus performance. I'd rather use the 1.4x and crop more if it's going to give me noticeably better AF and better IQ. Any thoughts?

Also, if hiring works out quite expensive I'll probably buy used and then sell it on again after if I'd lose less money.

Firstly why would anyone want to go watch that snorefest! Zzzzz

That aside, how close are you to track? Do you have any obstacles in your way?

Why is the 150-600 to heavy would a monopod not solve that?

I've seen people shoot with 24mm at these events as they are close.

More info needed.

 

[snerkler]

Firstly why would anyone want to go watch that snorefest! Zzzzz

That aside, how close are you to track? Do you have any obstacles in your way?

Why is the 150-600 to heavy would a monopod not solve that?

I've seen people shoot with 24mm at these events as they are close.

More info needed.

You can't get that close to trackside at Silverstone, there's a lot of run off areas. I'm useless at judging distances so don't even ask 24mm was too wide at Donington and cars looked minute in the frame so I expect it's going to be even worse at Silverstone. I could pan better handheld that with monopod. Monopods are fine if you're on flat ground shooting horizontally, but if you're on a slope of shooting down as you spin on the monopod you're cameras moves in a arc rather than horizontally. I will be taking the monopod, and aim to get better, but even on a monopod the 150-600mm isn't as easy to handle.

At Silverstone if you want to get down to track level you're always shooting through a fence. You can go up in the stands, but then the angle of the shot isn't great. I will be moving around the track over the 3 days though to see where the best position is.

 

[kingo15]

Are you camping there?

 

[Nuzik]

You can't get that close to trackside at Silverstone, there's a lot of run off areas. I'm useless at judging distances so don't even ask 24mm was too wide at Donington and cars looked minute in the frame so I expect it's going to be even worse at Silverstone. I could pan better handheld that with monopod. Monopods are fine if you're on flat ground shooting horizontally, but if you're on a slope of shooting down as you spin on the monopod you're cameras moves in a arc rather than horizontally. I will be taking the monopod, and aim to get better, but even on a monopod the 150-600mm isn't as easy to handle.

At Silverstone if you want to get down to track level you're always shooting through a fence. You can go up in the stands, but then the angle of the shot isn't great. I will be moving around the track over the 3 days though to see where the best position is.

I've had a little skim over this, they have some good tips and even do a lap of the track on part 3 of where is good

http://www.grandprixphotographs.com...tographer-part-1-how-to-approach-the-subject/

 

[Chuckoir]

Grand Prix is in what, July? That gives you five months to start lifting some weights, so the 150-600mm isn't such a heavy beast.

HTH.

 

[snerkler]

Are you camping there?

No, staying in a hotel.

I've had a little skim over this, they have some good tips and even do a lap of the track on part 3 of where is good

http://www.grandprixphotographs.com...tographer-part-1-how-to-approach-the-subject/

I'll have a look at that later, thanks. I'm reasonably comfortable with how to shoot/technique etc but always good to get new tips to help me improve.

Grand Prix is in what, July? That gives you five months to start lifting some weights, so the 150-600mm isn't such a heavy beast.

HTH.

Unfortunately nerve damage to the arm means I have to think about weight of gear etc. Fortunately I'm a big guy so can compensate to an extent, but it can still be an issue at times.

 

[Chuckoir]

No, staying in a hotel.


I'll have a look at that later, thanks. I'm reasonably comfortable with how to shoot/technique etc but always good to get new tips to help me improve.

Unfortunately nerve damage to the arm means I have to think about weight of gear etc. Fortunately I'm a big guy so can compensate to an extent, but it can still be an issue at times.

Sounds painful - Okay, you're excused!

 

[kingo15]

No, staying in a hotel.


I'll have a look at that later, thanks. I'm reasonably comfortable with how to shoot/technique etc but always good to get new tips to help me improve.

Unfortunately nerve damage to the arm means I have to think about weight of gear etc. Fortunately I'm a big guy so can compensate to an extent, but it can still be an issue at times.

If you fancy a meet up Friday after free practice let me know. As the track is only 20 mins up the road from me.

 

[T_J_G]

Went for a winter walk this morning (but not early enough to avoid the harsh light)

Amelia close up by Tim G, on Flickr

Amelia cold walk by Tim G, on Flickr

 

[snerkler]

If you fancy a meet up Friday after free practice let me know. As the track is only 20 mins up the road from me.

I'd be more than happy to meet up at the track but afterwards I don't think my wife would be too happy for me to then go do more photography stuff, she's going to be bored to tears long enough as it is

 

[snerkler]

Went for a winter walk this morning (but not early enough to avoid the harsh light)

Amelia close up by Tim G, on Flickr

Amelia cold walk by Tim G, on Flickr

First one's great

 

[kingo15]

I'd be more than happy to meet up at the track but afterwards I don't think my wife would be too happy for me to then go do more photography stuff, she's going to be bored to tears long enough as it is [emoji38]

Haha I just meant for a drink

 

[T_J_G]

First one's great

Thanks, if only she looked vaguely happy

 

[Graham]

Who said something about more photos here
A yellow rose in the in-laws garden
Yellow rose 2 by Graham, on Flickr
The white line is a hunters car passing
Stars 1 by Graham, on Flickr
Taken with the 300mm
Sailing away by Graham, on Flickr

Just 3 from last year
The Night sky one was in Dec early morning, I was bricking it as I could hear a wild boar rummaging about in the bushes not far from me

 

[T_J_G]

Love the stars one @Graham.

 

[Mag1cp2x]

Firstly why would anyone want to go watch that snorefest! Zzzzz

An apparently never ending procession of over indulged young millionaires wearing silly looking multi coloured helmets going round and round in circles - no WAIT, oh Noooo, I think one of them might have to stop for a tyre change, oh this is just TOO exciting

 

[snerkler]

Who said something about more photos here
A yellow rose in the in-laws garden
Yellow rose 2 by Graham, on Flickr
The white line is a hunters car passing
Stars 1 by Graham, on Flickr
Taken with the 300mm
Sailing away by Graham, on Flickr

Just 3 from last year
The Night sky one was in Dec early morning, I was bricking it as I could hear a wild boar rummaging about in the bushes not far from me

Rose is great. Not quite sure about the central composition but I really like the softness almost pastel like feel of the image.

 

[snerkler]

An apparently never ending procession of over indulged young millionaires wearing silly looking multi coloured helmets going round and round in circles - no WAIT, oh Noooo, I think one of them might have to stop for a tyre change, oh this is just TOO exciting

Would be boring if we all liked the same thing and all had the same views

 

[Graham]

Rose is great. Not quite sure about the central composition but I really like the softness almost pastel like feel of the image.

Thanks, there is another shot on my Flickr.

Love the stars one @Graham.

Thanks, I used the IRIX 15mm lens for the stars.

 

[Graham]

Ok heres one of me when I was last in the Gorge du Verdon with the inversion behind me, 1st one I have properly seen and was as happy as

C`est moi by Graham, on Flickr

 

[snerkler]

Thanks, there is another shot on my Flickr.

Thanks, I used the IRIX 15mm lens for the stars.

I prefer the crop of that one, but the rendering of the one you've posted on here.

 

[rob-nikon]

Yes I loved it so would buy one back but if the F4 is nearly on par it make sense to save money??

I've been there and done that (bought a 70-200 f4 after owning a 70-200 f2.8 VR2), all I will say is I now own my second 70-200 f2.8 VR2. Don't get me wrong the 70-200 f4 is a great lens, its sharp across the frame (centre, mid and corners) compared to the f2.8 VR2 that is probably a little sharper in the centre. I sold my first VR2 to help pay for upgrading my long lens. I soon found I missed the 70-200 range and the lightness (yes the VR2 is light compared to a 3.4Kg lens!!). I picked up a f4 because it was cheaper and the reviews all had it as nearly as good. The crux of it for me was I missed the ability to have f2.8 when the light falls (it can make the different for a useable shutter speed or not totally insane ISO- although the D750 is pretty good in this respect). The other thing is teleconverters, the VR2 with a 1.4TC give a pretty good 100-280mm f4 lens whereas the 70-200 f4 is at f5.6. AF is good on both, the VR2 probably has the edge being a f2.8. In low light I always trust the AF on the VR2, its fantastic and very accurate. The build quality is better on the f2.8 VR2. I had it out in all weathers without any problem yet.

The easiest way to decide is if you need f2.8 or need to use teleconverters at f4 then its the f2.8 VR2 all the way, otherwise for many the f4 will be more than good enough. Build quality is subjective unless you often go out in the rain or dusty environments.

These reviews seem to be pretty good:

https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-70-200mm-f4g-vr/5

 

[rookies]

I've been there and done that (bought a 70-200 f4 after owning a 70-200 f2.8 VR2), all I will say is I now own my second 70-200 f2.8 VR2. Don't get me wrong the 70-200 f4 is a great lens, its sharp across the frame (centre, mid and corners) compared to the f2.8 VR2 that is probably a little sharper in the centre. I sold my first VR2 to help pay for upgrading my long lens. I soon found I missed the 70-200 range and the lightness (yes the VR2 is light compared to a 3.4Kg lens!!). I picked up a f4 because it was cheaper and the reviews all had it as nearly as good. The crux of it for me was I missed the ability to have f2.8 when the light falls (it can make the different for a useable shutter speed or not totally insane ISO- although the D750 is pretty good in this respect). The other thing is teleconverters, the VR2 with a 1.4TC give a pretty good 100-280mm f4 lens whereas the 70-200 f4 is at f5.6. AF is good on both, the VR2 probably has the edge being a f2.8. In low light I always trust the AF on the VR2, its fantastic and very accurate. The build quality is better on the f2.8 VR2. I had it out in all weathers without any problem yet.

The easiest way to decide is if you need f2.8 or need to use teleconverters at f4 then its the f2.8 VR2 all the way, otherwise for many the f4 will be more than good enough. Build quality is subjective unless you often go out in the rain or dusty environments.

These reviews seem to be pretty good:

https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-70-200mm-f4g-vr/5

Thank you never though about TC as that is something I would add.. VRii coming back then lol